2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Cenobamate as an Early Adjunctive Treatment in Drug-Resistant Focal-Onset Seizures: An Observational Cohort Study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background and Objectives

          Cenobamate (CNB) is a new antiseizure medication (ASM) to treat drug-resistant, focal-onset seizures. Data on its use in early therapy lines are not yet available, and clinicians frequently consider CNB to be a later ASM drug choice. We investigated the efficacy and safety of CNB as an early adjunctive treatment in drug-resistant, focal-onset seizures.

          Methods

          The study population were patients with drug-resistant, focal-onset seizures who were initiated with CNB after they did not respond to two or three lifetime ASMs, including all prior and concomitant ASMs. These patients were matched (1:2) by sex, age, and seizure frequency to controls who were initiated with any ASM other than CNB. All participants participated in the Mainz Epilepsy Registry. We evaluated the retention rate after 12 months of CNB and after each new adjunctive ASM in the control group. In addition, seizure freedom and the response rate (reduction of seizure frequency by ≥ 50% from baseline) after 12 months were estimated.

          Results

          We included 231 patients aged 44.4 ± 15.8 years. Of these, 33.3% ( n = 77) were on CNB, 19.0% ( n = 44) on valproate (VPA), 17.3% ( n = 40) on lacosamide (LCS), 16.4% ( n = 38) on levetiracetam (LEV), and 13.9% ( n = 32) on topiramate (TPM). The highest retention rate after 12 months since the beginning of the early adjunctive therapy was observed on CNB (92.0%), compared with LCS (80.0%), LEV (73.3%), VPA (68.2%), or TPM (62.5%) ( p < 0.05). Seizure freedom and response rate were also the best on CNB (19.5% and 71.4%, respectively) compared with other ASMs (8.3% and 52.5%, respectively; p < 0.05). No significant differences in adverse events between CNB and other ASMs were observed.

          Conclusions

          Our study provides evidence that CNB is an effective ASM with a good safety profile in the early therapy lines of drug-resistant, focal-onset seizures. This data should support medical decision making in the management of patients with refractory epilepsy.

          Clinical Trial ID

          NCT05267405.

          Related collections

          Most cited references43

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Definition of drug resistant epilepsy: consensus proposal by the ad hoc Task Force of the ILAE Commission on Therapeutic Strategies.

          To improve patient care and facilitate clinical research, the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) appointed a Task Force to formulate a consensus definition of drug resistant epilepsy. The overall framework of the definition has two "hierarchical" levels: Level 1 provides a general scheme to categorize response to each therapeutic intervention, including a minimum dataset of knowledge about the intervention that would be needed; Level 2 provides a core definition of drug resistant epilepsy using a set of essential criteria based on the categorization of response (from Level 1) to trials of antiepileptic drugs. It is proposed as a testable hypothesis that drug resistant epilepsy is defined as failure of adequate trials of two tolerated, appropriately chosen and used antiepileptic drug schedules (whether as monotherapies or in combination) to achieve sustained seizure freedom. This definition can be further refined when new evidence emerges. The rationale behind the definition and the principles governing its proper use are discussed, and examples to illustrate its application in clinical practice are provided.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Operational classification of seizure types by the International League Against Epilepsy: Position Paper of the ILAE Commission for Classification and Terminology

            The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) presents a revised operational classification of seizure types. The purpose of such a revision is to recognize that some seizure types can have either a focal or generalized onset, to allow classification when the onset is unobserved, to include some missing seizure types, and to adopt more transparent names. Because current knowledge is insufficient to form a scientifically based classification, the 2017 Classification is operational (practical) and based on the 1981 Classification, extended in 2010. Changes include the following: (1) "partial" becomes "focal"; (2) awareness is used as a classifier of focal seizures; (3) the terms dyscognitive, simple partial, complex partial, psychic, and secondarily generalized are eliminated; (4) new focal seizure types include automatisms, behavior arrest, hyperkinetic, autonomic, cognitive, and emotional; (5) atonic, clonic, epileptic spasms, myoclonic, and tonic seizures can be of either focal or generalized onset; (6) focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizure replaces secondarily generalized seizure; (7) new generalized seizure types are absence with eyelid myoclonia, myoclonic absence, myoclonic-atonic, myoclonic-tonic-clonic; and (8) seizures of unknown onset may have features that can still be classified. The new classification does not represent a fundamental change, but allows greater flexibility and transparency in naming seizure types.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Treatment Outcomes in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Epilepsy Treated With Established and New Antiepileptic Drugs

              A study published in 2000 showed that more than one-third of adults with epilepsy have inadequate control of seizures with antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). This study evaluates overall treatment outcomes in light of the introduction of more than 1 dozen new AEDs in the past 2 decades.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                yaroslav.winter@unimedizin-mainz.de
                Journal
                CNS Drugs
                CNS Drugs
                CNS Drugs
                Springer International Publishing (Cham )
                1172-7047
                1179-1934
                3 August 2024
                3 August 2024
                2024
                : 38
                : 9
                : 733-742
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.410607.4, Mainz Comprehensive Epilepsy and Sleep Medicine Center, Department of Neurology, , University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, ; Langenbeckstrasse 1, 55131 Mainz, Germany
                [2 ]Department of Neurology, Philipps-University Marburg, ( https://ror.org/01rdrb571) Marburg, Germany
                [3 ]GRID grid.410607.4, Department of Neurology, , Focus Program Translational Neuroscience (FTN), Rhine Main Neuroscience Network, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, ; Mainz, Germany
                [4 ]Department of Neurology, Hephata Klinik, Schwalmstadt, Germany
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9854-4038
                Article
                1109
                10.1007/s40263-024-01109-9
                11316687
                39096467
                0779cc19-a856-4b54-be49-0d9d5ef0b39e
                © The Author(s) 2024

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 14 July 2024
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100006546, Angelini Pharma;
                Award ID: not appicable
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Universitätsmedizin der Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz (8974)
                Categories
                Original Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024

                Comments

                Comment on this article